Intel Core i3-1115G4 vs Intel Core i9-9980XE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided picture. Across all eight recorded head-to-head tests, the Intel Core i9-9980XE claims victory, with wins in every single category. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the simple win count suggests.

The most dramatic gaps appear in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-9980XE scores 26,780 against the i3-1115G4's 4,933, a delta of 442.9%. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a nearly identical pattern: 11,247 versus 2,071, again a 443.1% advantage. Even Geekbench multi-core, which tends to compress differences between processors, shows the i9-9980XE at 11,270 versus 2,465, a 357.2% lead.

Single-core results are where the analysis gets interesting. The i9-9980XE still wins every single-core test, but the margin shrinks dramatically in Geekbench single-core: 1,437 versus 1,330, a mere 8% delta. This is a surprisingly small gap given the architectural and generational differences between the two parts. The i3-1115G4 is a 2020 mobile processor built on a newer 10 nm process, and its single-thread performance in Geekbench comes within striking distance of the 2018 desktop extreme processor.

The Cinebench single-core tests tell a different story. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i9-9980XE scores 3,780 against 696, a 443.1% lead. The Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests show similar 442.9% and 443.5% deltas respectively. The discrepancy between the Cinebench and Geekbench single-core results is curious. The Geekbench test appears to measure something different, perhaps a workload that favors the newer Tiger Lake microarchitecture's specific strengths, while Cinebench's rendering workload scales more directly with raw clock speed and older core design advantages.

The i3-1115G4 does have additional PassMark benchmark data recorded in the database, though no head-to-head comparison exists for those tests against the i9-9980XE. These include a PassMark single-thread score of 2,585, floating point math at 10,791, and integer math at 17,472. Without corresponding i9-9980XE scores, these numbers stand alone as reference points for the mobile chip's capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is stark but requires careful interpretation. The i9-9980XE wins all eight head-to-head benchmarks, so on raw recorded performance, it takes every category. The real question is what the magnitude of each win implies for different workloads.

For heavily multi-threaded applications, the i9-9980XE is in a completely different class. Its 18 cores and 36 threads versus the i3-1115G4's 2 cores and 4 threads create an insurmountable gap in any workload that scales with core count. Rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, and compilation tasks would all fall into this category. The Cinebench multi-core scores, all hovering around 443% deltas, consistently quantify this advantage.

For lightly threaded workloads, the picture changes subtly. The Geekbench single-core result shows the i3-1115G4 nearly matching the i9-9980XE. This suggests that for everyday responsive tasks, web browsing, office productivity, and light content consumption, the mobile chip's newer architecture compensates for its lower clock speeds and fewer cores. The i9-9980XE still wins, but the 8% margin indicates the i3-1115G4 is not outclassed in this domain.

The i3-1115G4 also brings integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, which the i9-9980XE lacks entirely. For systems without a discrete GPU, this makes the mobile chip functional for display output and basic graphics acceleration out of the box. The desktop extreme processor requires a separate graphics solution.

Thermal and power envelopes further separate the use cases. The i9-9980XE carries a 165 W TDP against the i3-1115G4's 15 W. This makes the i3-1115G4 viable for thin-and-light laptops and passively cooled or low-noise systems, while the i9-9980XE demands substantial desktop cooling and power delivery.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different Intel design eras. The i9-9980XE uses the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-X variant, built on a 14 nm process with a die size of 484 mm². The i3-1115G4 uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-U with Willow Cove cores, built on a 10 nm process with a die size of 144 mm².

Core layouts diverge sharply. The i9-9980XE packs 18 cores and 36 threads, while the i3-1115G4 has just 2 cores and 4 threads. Cache hierarchies reflect this difference. The i9-9980XE has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 24.75 MB of shared L3. The i3-1115G4 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Per-core cache is actually larger on the Tiger Lake chip, which helps explain its competitive single-thread showing.

The memory subsystems are equally divergent. The i9-9980XE supports DDR4 memory over a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The i3-1115G4 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. PCIe connectivity also differs: the i9-9980XE offers Gen 3 with 44 lanes from the CPU, while the i3-1115G4 offers Gen 4 with only 4 lanes from the CPU.

The i9-9980XE has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking; the i3-1115G4 does not. The i9-9980XE is end-of-life production status, while the i3-1115G4 remains active. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The i9-9980XE targets the desktop segment on Intel Socket 2066; the i3-1115G4 targets mobile on Intel BGA 1449.

Specification Differences

The core count difference is the most obvious: 18 cores and 36 threads for the i9-9980XE versus 2 cores and 4 threads for the i3-1115G4. Base clocks are 3.00 GHz and 2.20 GHz respectively, with boost clocks of 4.50 GHz and 4.10 GHz. The i9-9980XE's TDP of 165 W dwarfs the i3-1115G4's 15 W.

Process technology separates them by one node: 14 nm for the i9-9980XE, 10 nm for the i3-1115G4. Die sizes are 484 mm² versus 144 mm². The i9-9980XE has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, while the i3-1115G4 has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core. Shared L3 is 24.75 MB for the desktop chip and 6 MB for the mobile chip.

Memory support differs: DDR4 only for the i9-9980XE, DDR4 and LPDDR4X for the i3-1115G4. Memory bus widths are quad-channel and dual-channel respectively. The i9-9980XE has 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU; the i3-1115G4 has 4 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The i9-9980XE has no integrated graphics; the i3-1115G4 includes Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4.

Release dates set them two years apart: October 2018 for the i9-9980XE, September 2020 for the i3-1115G4. The i9-9980XE has a launch MSRP of $1979; the i3-1115G4 has a launch MSRP of $281. The i9-9980XE's multiplier is unlocked; the i3-1115G4's is locked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The i9-9980XE wins all multi-core tests by large margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 26,780 against the i3-1115G4's 4,933, a 442.9% advantage. Geekbench multi-core shows 11,270 versus 2,465, a 357.2% lead.

Q: How close is single-core performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. Geekbench single-core shows the i9-9980XE at 1,437 and the i3-1115G4 at 1,330, only an 8% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core, however, shows 3,780 versus 696, a 443.1% difference.

Q: Do both processors support integrated graphics?

A: No. The i3-1115G4 includes Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, while the i9-9980XE has no integrated graphics and requires a separate GPU.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The i9-9980XE supports DDR4 over a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The i3-1115G4 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The i9-9980XE is end-of-life, while the i3-1115G4 is active production.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The i9-9980XE has 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU. The i3-1115G4 has 4 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU.

The Verdict

The data points to two processors built for entirely different purposes. The i9-9980XE is an 18-core desktop extreme part with a 165 W TDP, quad-channel memory, 44 PCIe lanes, and an unlocked multiplier. The i3-1115G4 is a 2-core mobile part with a 15 W TDP, dual-channel memory, 4 PCIe lanes, integrated graphics, and a locked multiplier.

For users whose workloads scale across many cores, the i9-9980XE is the clear choice. Its multi-core benchmark results, consistently around 443% ahead of the i3-1115G4 in Cinebench tests, make it suitable for rendering, compilation, and other parallel workloads. The Geekbench multi-core margin of 357.2% reinforces this conclusion.

For users prioritizing portability, low power consumption, and integrated graphics, the i3-1115G4 is the appropriate selection. Its 15 W TDP and mobile socket enable laptop designs that the desktop-only i9-9980XE cannot serve. The Geekbench single-core result, only 8% behind the i9-9980XE, suggests the mobile chip handles everyday responsiveness adequately.

The i9-9980XE wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, but the context matters. A processor that requires a desktop platform, discrete graphics, and substantial cooling cannot be directly substituted for a mobile chip designed for thin laptops. The recorded data supports choosing the i9-9980XE for maximum compute throughput and the i3-1115G4 for mobile and integrated-graphics scenarios. Both processors occupy the 63rd percentile versus all CPUs in the database, an interesting coincidence given their radically different designs and market positions.